Danek Duvall wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:31:39PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > > >> This seems like something we should be able to figure out on our own. >> We should have some way of "knowing" (by an image attribute or a file >> timestamp?) that the index needs to be synchronized. >> > > And Brock is doing precisely that. The issue is that Brock would like for > the end-user to know that something had gone wrong, even if we were able to > fix it successfully, on the expectation that they'll still complain, so we > can a) figure out that it's happening at all, and b) we can have some hope > of fixing it. > > A worthy goal, but I'd rather have it silent for now (unless it can't > update the indices in full, either, of course). > > Danek >
Ok, I'll go that route then. (I really should read all the responses before starting to respond to them in turn, I nearly duplicated your first paragraph.) I'll put in an XXX comment and move everything inside imageplan.py. If there's decent chance that this messaging the user capability will be coming, then I'll leave things as they are (ie, try to update in sync, then rebuild from scratch only if the first attempt failed) Another CR will be coming out in a little bit. Thanks, Brock _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
